Hillary’s People Bracing For Impact

For months and months we have been hearing snippets of the Hillary Clinton server/email saga. We cant begin to put it all in chronological order yet much less can we know all the players involved. We do know there are countless investigations and the most recent State Department Inspector General report is the most damning of all summaries so far. Curiously, Hillary and some in her inner circle refused to be interviewed or cooperate with the IG.

Furthermore, there are more testimonies yet to be recorded where Judicial Watch has been granted judge’s authority to move forward with key Hillary people as the judge is experienced with the Hillary email matter, going back to 1998 Filegate.

   

So, personally, I would like to see some questioned posed to Hillary and her entire team and they include:

  1. If Hillary did not send or receive classified material in her only email address and server, since she never had a dot gov email address, then exactly where did she received or interact on classified material? As noted by this particular email, she asked that items be printed out and delivered to her in hardcopy.
  2. So, we have hardcopies, okay then, well, where is that paper and did she shred the hardcopies? Remember in the case of David Petraeus, he had a hardcopy bound note book, a personal journal that Paula Broadwell got access to.
  3. Two part question: So, now we know that Hillary did not have any password protected mobile device. Did anyone tell her to apply password protections to her Blackberry, iPad or iPhone? When Hillary was asked if she wiped the server and her response was you mean with a cloth? I stood alone responding she does not know how any of this works. Appears to now be quite accurate and further, did not one person in her inner circle teach her the fundamentals?
  4. Did Hillary ever get any briefings in a classified setting like a SCIF? Hillary has never mentioned using a SCIF much less has there been reference to having access to a SCIF in any emails that have been published.
  5. Has anyone asked Hillary or her team if she had other email addresses outside of those listed on her server like at any time like Lavabit or Silent Circle or even Reagan dot com, not that the last one she would even consider? Hillary was using a Blackberry going back to when she was a senator, and Lavabit was the encrypted service of choice at the time.
  6. Barack Obama issued an Executive Order #13526 which further tightened regulations of classified material and interaction of classified material, did Hillary and her team bother to take this seriously and if so how? Did they make the mandated adjustments in this regard?
  7. Did Hillary or any on her team sign a separation document upon leaving the State Department? The answer is not that anyone can find. So, what is the procedure on that with regard further turning over all government material and correspondence?
  8. A top Hillary aid said he wanted to avoid FOIA (Freedom of Information Act Requests) and this is curious as he would likely not care unless it was an edict put out by Hillary herself? So, is this a criminal act in and of itself?

So, Judicial Watch is still busy interviewing the Hillary team. The testimony of Ambassador Lukens is here. Cheryl Mills along with her attorney Beth Wilkinson filed a recent motion to block the public release of the video tape of her testimony with Judicial Watch.

There is still the matter of the investigation of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Foundation. My buddy Charles Ortel has given up all other matters to take the deep dive and continue the investigation. He has uncovered some remarkable facts that are beyond dispute. On May 19, 2016, I interviewed Charles. He gave a chilling summary of facts to date.

Obama Concession to Iran: Russian Arms?

Obama Admin Considers Permitting Advanced Russian Arms Sales to Iran

White House might not invoke laws triggering new sanctions
FreeBeacon: The Obama administration has the power to sanction key Russian arms sales to Iran, but has so far abstained from exercising this right under U.S. law, prompting some in Congress to question whether the administration is “acquiescing” to the arms sales in order to appease Iran, according to conversations with sources and recent congressional correspondence to the White House exclusively obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

President Barack Obama has the authority under U.S. law to designate as illegal Russia’s contested sale to Iran of the S-300 missile system, an advanced long-range weapon that would boost the Islamic Republic’s regional military might.

However, the administration has declined for weeks to clarify its stance on new sanctions, despite expressing opposition to the sale. Administration officials have further declined to answer questions from the Free Beacon and other outlets about whether the president will consider taking action in the future.

The administration’s hesitance to act has prompted a new congressional inquiry, the Free Beacon has learned, and has sparked accusations that the White House is not exercising its sanction authority in order to prevent Iran from walking away from last summer’s nuclear deal.

Rep. Steve Chabot (R., Ohio) sent an inquiry to the White House about the matter more than a month ago. The White House has not responded.

“Given the series implications for the United States and our allies in the region, I respectfully request that you quickly determine that Russia’s transfer of S-300 surface-to-air missile systems advance Iran’s efforts to acquire ‘destabilizing numbers and types of advances conventional weapons’ and impose the necessary U.S. sanctions once the Russian delivery takes place,” Chabot wrote to the White House on April 7, according to a copy of the letter obtained by the Free Beacon.

Chabot outlined concern “that without such a determination the United States may be viewed as acquiescing to this transfer” of a major defensive weapons system to Iran.

Chabot told the Free Beacon on Thursday the administration has not responded to multiple inquiries about the potential designation.

“Despite multiple inquires to the U.S. Department of State, I still have not received a response on Russia’s S300 surface-to-air missile system transfer to Iran,” Chabot said. “This apparent dismissal leaves me wondering what exactly the Administration is hiding. I am really asking a simple question – is the introduction of a sophisticated weapon system into Iran, that has not been there previously, going to illicit the appropriate U.S. sanctions response? I am not sure why the Administration has found it so hard to come to a determination. The S300 is one of the most advanced anti-aircraft missile system’s in the world and significantly bolsters Iran’s offensive capabilities and stands as a serious hurdle to our efforts to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear armed state. This is absolutely a destabilizing conventional weapon system.”

When contacted for comment, a State Department official told the Free Beacon that the administration has not made a final determination about whether the S-300 sale would trigger additional U.S. sanctions.

“We’re continuing to closely follow reports concerning the delivery of the S-300 defensive missile system from Russia to Iran‎,” the official said. “We have not made a determination as to whether this delivery, if and when complete, would trigger any actions under U.S. authorities.”

“These systems would significantly bolster Iran’s offensive capabilities and introduce new obstacles to our efforts to eliminate the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon. I believe existing U.S. sanctions should be used to deter Russia from transferring this or other dangerous weapons systems to Iran,” Chabot said.

The sale is technically permitted under current United Nations resolutions governing weapons sales. However, the Obama administration has the right to veto the sale at the U.N. Security Council. The administration has not committed to doing so.

U.S. law also grants the president the right to designate such sales as illicit and therefore open to sanctions.

The Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act of 1992 grants the president authority to sanction the sale of “advanced conventional weapons” to Iran by any nation.

“U.S. law provides your administration with the authority to apply U.S. sanctions in response” to the sale, Chabot explains in his letter. “For example, the Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act and the Iran Sanctions Act provide authority for you to sanction individuals or countries that you determine are aiding Iran’s efforts to acquire or develop ‘destabilizing numbers and types of advanced conventional weapons.’”

Sanctions would kick in if the president decides that such a sale would destabilize the Middle East and shift regional balance.

“Iran’s acquisition of these systems would embolden Tehran to adopt a more threatening regional posture and to pursue offensive activities detrimental to regional stability in the belief that the systems would deter retaliation,” according to Chabot.

Reporters as well as lawmakers have attempted for weeks to get an answer from the administration about whether the president would make such a determination.

One foreign policy adviser who works closely with Congress on the Iran issue told the Free Beacon that the administration can no longer waffle on the issue.

“The administration tried to look the other way, but got called out for it by Congress. Then they spent a month and a half hoping that the whole thing would go away,” the source said. “Now I don’t know what they’re going to do, since it’s obvious that they’re letting Iran import advanced weapons in violation of U.S. law just to preserve the nuclear deal.”

Really, They are Working for Bernie’s Campaign?

Another Radical Islamist in the Sanders Camp

IPT: As Democratic Party leaders struggle to end their increasingly vitriolic presidential primary campaign, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is winning concessions in hopes he’ll tone down the rhetoric.

Earlier this week, Sanders secured five seats on the party’s platform committee, with one immediately going to James Zogby, a staunch Palestinian advocate and critic of Israel.

Last month, we focused on Sanders’ reliance on Linda Sarsour as a campaign surrogate. Sarsour also is a Palestinian activist with a history of vitriolic anti-Israel statements. “Nothing is creepier than Zionism,” she wrote on Twitter about the idea that Jews can return to their ancestral homeland as a refuge from global anti-Semitism. To Sarsour, that ideal is racist.

Memorial Day weekend’s approach brings to mind another prominent Sanders supporter, Zahra Billoo, who has repeatedly expressed discomfort with the holiday. “Many of our troops are engaged in terrorism,” she wrote in June 2012.

Billoo heads the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ (CAIR) San Francisco office. CAIR has roots in a Hamas-support network created by the Muslim Brotherhood in American, internal documents and eyewitness accounts show.

Two weeks ago, Billoo made it clear her views about American troops have not changed, questioning the holiday’s value: “You think we should honor people who commit war crimes?” she asked an incredulous questioner. She “proudly stands by” her opinion, she also wrote.

Despite these extreme views, or perhaps because of them, Billoo appears to be playing a significant role in the Sanders campaign. Her social media accounts are filled with pro-Sanders messages – including repeated reminders about the registration deadline to be eligible for June 7 California primary. She was granted backstage access to a Sanders rally last week in San Jose where she was photographed with the candidate.

Billoo also has argued that American citizens who move to Israel and join the army are no different from those who join ISIS. “Is one genocidal group different than the other?” she asked last year.

Billoo’s extremism applies to domestic policy, too. She casts FBI counter-terror investigations as illegitimate and even corrupt. She blasted the conviction of five former officials from the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation after records showed they illegally routed millions of dollars to Hamas. And, in the wake of a Portland man’s arrest for plotting to blow up a Christmas tree lighting ceremony crowded with children, she suggested to a reporter that the FBI hyped the threat.

“The question is, are we looking to stop radicalization and stop extremism before it becomes a problem or do we want a sensational story?” Billoo asked. “And I’d really argue here that the FBI was looking for a sensational story.”

The suspect, Mohamed Mohamud, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 30 years in prison. Among the evidence against him was a recording in which he said, “I want whoever is attending that event to be, to leave either dead or injured.”

Billoo’s opinions hold steady regardless of the facts. Maybe that’s why she’s comfortable being involved in campaign politics.


Zahra Billoo is at Sanders’ left, dressed in purple.

 

 

Fast and Furious Weapons and Mass Killings

Documents: Mexican Cartels Used Fast and Furious Guns For Mass Killings

TownHall: New documents obtained by the government watchdog Judicial Watch prove, again, that guns sold through the Obama Justice Department’s Fast and Furious Operation have been used by Mexican cartels for mass murder south of the border.

“According to the new records, over the past three years, a total of 94 Fast and Furious firearms have been recovered in Mexico City and 12 Mexican states, with the majority being seized in Sonora, Chihuahua and Sinaloa.  Of the weapons recovered, 82 were rifles and 12 were pistols identified as having been part of the Fast and Furious program.  Reports suggest the Fast and Furious guns are tied to at least 69 killings,” Judicial Watch reports. “The documents show 94 Fast and Furious firearms were seized, 20 were identified as being involved in ‘violent recoveries.’  The ‘violent recoveries’ involved several mass killings.”

The documents include locations, type of gun recovered and number of people killed:

June 30, 2014 — One 7.62mm rifle recovered in Tlatlaya, Estado de Mexico.  This is the reported date and location of a shootout in which 22 people were killed.

May 22, 2015 — Two 7.62mm rifles recovered from the site of a massive shootout in Rancho el Sol, Michoacán, that left one Mexican Federal Police officer and 42 suspected cartel members dead.

August 7, 2015 — One 7.62mm rifle was among five firearms reported as recovered from an abandoned stolen vehicle in which three dead shooting victims were found in Parral, Chihuahua.

January 29, 2013 — One 7.62mm rifle seized in Hostotipaquillo, Jalisco is reportedly related to the assassination of the town police chief, Luis Lucio Astorga and his bodyguard.

January 11, 2016 — One .50 caliber rifle seized from the Joaquin “Chapo” Guzman’s hideout in Los Mochis, Sinaloa, where he was (re)arrested.

Keep in mind these stats only relate to 94 Fast and Furious guns, most of them being AK-47s and .50 caliber rifles, that have been recovered. The Department of Justice, with help from ATF, trafficked more than 2500 of them right into the hands of violent Mexican cartels members. Fast and Furious guns are only recoverable and traceable when they are left at crime scenes, which doesn’t account for the number of times they were used in previous crimes.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder admitted during congressional testimony years ago that guns trafficked by the DOJ would be used to carry out violent crimes. In 2011, former House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa told reporters, citing Mexican Attorney General Marisela Morales, hundreds of Mexican citizens had been murdered as a result of the operation. Since then, a number of guns from the operation have been found at crime scenes in the U.S.

“These documents show President Obama’s legacy includes one of gunrunning and violence in Fast and Furious,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.  “As the production of documents from the ATF continues, we expect to see even further confirmation of Obama’s disgraced former Attorney General Eric Holder’s prediction that Fast and Furious guns will be used in crimes for years to come.”

Last month a federal judge struck down an executive privilege claim made by President Obama in June 2012 over thousands of Fast and Furious documents. Those documents show the lengths Holder and his closest aides at DOJ went to cover-up the Operation and the scandal that followed, which became public when Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered by Mexican bandits in December 2010. They were carrying guns from Operation Fast and Furious.

Warning: Europe Terrorist Explosive Stockpiles

Terrorists likely stockpiling explosives in EU, says Europol

The threat of terrorists attacks in the EU remains the top national security concern among member states, with some 211 foiled plots last year alone, according to a top EU security official.

The threat of another attack similar in scale to the Paris attack in November last year or in Brussels this past March has national authorities on edge. Manuel Navarrete Paniagua, the head of the European Counter Terrorism Centre at the EU police agency Europol, told euro-deputies on Monday (23 May) that terrorist cells in the EU were likely stockpiling explosives for later use.

“We have some information reported by the member states that terrorists groups are trying to establish large clandestine stockpiles of explosives in the European Union to be used eventually in large scale home attacks,” he said.

Related: EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report

Paniagua was briefing MEPs in the civil liberties committee on the yet-to-be published EU Terrorism Situation & Trend Report (TE-SAT) compiled by Europol and member states.

The report is set for publication in a few weeks’ time.

Paniagua cited figures and broader conclusions due in the report, noting that “jihadist terrorism” remains the top threat to security in the European Union.

The latest attacks in the EU suggest much better coordination among the terrorists than previously thought. He said their combined use of explosives and firearms was also a novelty and a threat that is evolving rapidly.

Authorities have yet to nail down any single profile of a home-grown terrorist or foreign fighter.

But he said many have petty criminal backgrounds. He pointed out a significant proportion of foreign fighters have also been diagnosed with mental problems.

More than 4,000 so-called foreign fighters have been identified in the EU and entered into a Europol database.

“Using the terrorist financial tracking programme, we provided last year more than 2,700 leads regarding foreign terrorist fighters to the member states,” he said.

Some 1,057 people were also arrested last year on terrorism-related offences, he said.

He said there are also unconfirmed reports that some jihadist militants have set up training camps in the Western Balkans and some EU states.

Terrorists and migration flows

Other concerns related to terrorists exploiting the migration flows from Turkey and elsewhere to enter the European Union.

“We found no evidence of the systematic of using this flow to infiltrate terrorists into the European Union. But they do, they use it, we have some cases, some of the people that perpetrated the Paris attacks were eventually disguised in this immigration flow,” he said.

Paniagua said migrants were being victimised twice as result. First they flee terrorists and then again when the same attempt to infiltrate the EU by hiding among the refugees, he said.

“Again, we have no indication that this systematic,” he said.

Earlier this month, Europol announced it would deploy some 200 counter-terrorist and other investigators to migrant arrival centres known as hotspots in Italy and Greece.

Related: Implementing the European Agenda on Security:
EU action plan against illicit trafficking in and use of firearms and explosives.

Of those, Europol said it would dispatch around 50 “at key points on the external border of the EU” to track down and help identify suspected criminals and terrorists.

A European Commission report earlier this month noted that Turkey is suspected to have around 1,300 Turkish citizens fighting alongside Islamic militant groups in Syria and Iraq.

It noted that the plan to lift visa restrictions on Turkish nationals “could potentially have an impact on the terrorist risk in the EU”.

*****

For the United States, the Warning from DHS in 2011

(U//FOUO) DHS Warning: Terrorists Making Explosives With Commercial Products

Terrorist Acquisition of Commercial Products for Improvised Explosive Device Production(U//FOUO) Recent plots and attacks in the Homeland and overseas demonstrate a continuing terrorist focus on acquiring commercially available materials and components that can be used in constructing improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Heightened public and state and local official awareness, as well as tightened legal controls, have made it more difficult to purchase certain products that contain explosive precursors in bulk quantities or concentrated forms. Operatives are now more likely to use surreptitious, though legal, methods—such as multiple purchases in smaller quantities—to acquire sufficient amounts to create explosives.

— (U) On 27 July 2011, investigators found precursor chemicals and other IED components, including smokeless powder, clocks, batteries, wires, and other items commonly used to make IEDs in the hotel room of a US Army soldier who allegedly sought to target military personnel.
— (U) The admitted perpetrator of the 22 July 2011 attacks in Oslo, Norway avoided law enforcement suspicion by acquiring through legal means the ammonium nitrate, aluminum powder, nitromethane, and blenders he used in constructing IEDs.

(U//FOUO) Commercial products containing precursor materials may include:
— (U//FOUO) Fertilizer and first aid cold packs (ammonium nitrate).
— (U//FOUO) Swimming pool chemicals (calcium hypochlorite/hydrogen peroxide).
— (U//FOUO) Some types of water filtration/treatment systems (potassium permanganate).
— (U//FOUO) Beauty supply products (hydrogen peroxide and acetone).
— (U//FOUO) Industrial cleaning supplies (hydrochloric acid or sulfuric acid).

(U) Potential Indicators of suspicious purchases: Most commercial products suitable for constructing IEDs serve legitimate purposes. Consequently, it is often difficult to identify purchases or other activities that may be associated with terrorist intent to create explosives. No single indicator is likely to divulge suspicious purchases, but, depending on specific circumstances, a combination of the behaviors listed below may warrant reporting and investigation:

— (U) Attempts to purchase all available stock or materials in bulk, especially by individuals with no previous history of bulk purchases.
— (U) Payment or insistence on payment in cash for bulk purchases, or using a credit card in another person’s name.
— (U) Insistence on in-store pickup instead of store delivery of bulk purchase.
— (U) Use of rented or out-of-state vehicle to transport bulk purchases.
— (U) Smaller purchases of the same products at different locations within a short period of time.
— (U) Displays of nervous or suspicious behavior and evasive or vague responses to questions about intended use of products.

(U//FOUO) For additional information, please see DHS-FBI Joint Homeland Security Assessment “(U//FOUO) Use of Common Precursor Chemicals to Make Homemade Explosives,” 10 August 2010; and Roll Call Release “(U//FOUO) Indicators of Suspicious Acquisition of Beauty Supply Products,” 26 February 2010.